The Spring Classics

There is a slight question as to whether some people with eg sight impairments have simply been overlooked in NL, just like they normal are here. That's because attitudes to cycling are somewhat like people drive here eg. it's just accepted that cycle paths are *for cycling*. Still much better than cars though I'd suggest. Ultimately in a car you're invulnerable and can barely hear the cries of horror and disapproval. Plus the world is still telling you you're more important than anyone without a car...

Indeed - and there will be "fighting over scraps" (largely dominated by pedestrian complaints because it's still a very popular mode) and it will be *impossible* to move forward (literally) because for "safety" cyclists will need to slow or indeed stop because we *have* to have formal crossings of a barely 1.5m cycle path... ... until some day the infra has been improved, and cyclists are a common sight, and many people do cycle sometimes. At which point most people will decide that *obviously* the cycle path is for cycling and it's antisocial to slow cyclists eg. by waiting for buses in the cycle path. And anyway there's no need to because cyclists aren't a "threat" and thus formal crossings aren't needed. Just wait a couple of seconds and they're past and you can cross the path in a couple of seconds yourself. The only reason I know that is because it happens thousands of times per day, a little over 100 miles away from the UK (and people in NL are hardly less argumentative than over here)...

(Immigrants, Labour, cyclists) They must love Deliveroo... turquoise kryptonite.

@Smoggysteve I don't know where this myth has come from that zebra crossings across cycle tracks are not legal zebra crossings because they don't have the same markings as a regular one, but it is a myth. The Traffic Sign Regulations and General Directions 2016 state that "Where a crossing is placed across a cycle track, the regulations permit the yellow globes (for zebra crossings) and zig-zag markings to be omitted for the part of the crossing placed on the cycle track, if desired." Zebra crossings across a cycle track have exactly the same force as a regular road one and the same recommendation to slow and stop for anyone waiting and compulsory obligation to stop for anyone already on the crossing.

If "[t]he answer seems to be in creating more dedicated on-street parking bays", I suspect they've already got that covered.

As a fellow Dylanologist, Ryan, I thought I'd try at least a verse: In a little hilltop village, we bargained for warm clothes We wanted cooler weather, God gave us a lethal dose A breakaway of innocents, they got struck down with scorn "Come in," they said, "we'll give ya, shelter from the storm."

I agree it's not a good look and cyclists should be giving way but I think I would be very nervous about an inattentive lime bike rider smacking me up the arse. Funnily enough this, of course, is exactly what drivers say when not giving way to pedestrians when turning into junctions. I wonder if I head to our high street to film drivers not giving way to pedestrians crossing a side road (I know exactly which junction I'm going to film) and I stuck that on social media what the reaction would be? That's motornormativity for you.

Not condoning the cyclists who failed to stop when it is obvious they should slow on approach to the bus stop and the crossing but... This entire fiasco was created because cyclists were less safe having to deal with impatient/dangerous drivers when manoeuvring around buses when they were at stops. And at no point are pedestrians/politicians complaining at comparable levels about the same situation at crossings when faced with drivers who don't stop. Almost everyone waits patiently untill it is safe to cross. Because that is what motor-normativity has done to us.

In theory them being "abandoned" is in part a benefit. The firm doesn't have to truck so many of them around since many will be collected by users. (Eg. finding one and going to it, rather than the docking station). How helpful to the users that is may be moot because of most dockless bike hire business models. In practice I think the docking model is less bad. However if cycling is actually facilitated eventually most people have their own bike *. And tying any hire in with public transport hubs (like NL's OV Fiets) then makes the most sense. Overall I keep thinking about NotJustBikes comment that most public bike hire schemes are an attempt to make up for a failure to provide (good enough) street-level public transport. * I think that's the case even now in the UK? Certainly I notice far more bikes stored locally (balconies, corridors...) than would appear to be regularly (or ever) used.

For those interested in the "how we could do this (better)" there's the Bicycle Dutch article and video as OnYerBike notes, and also: Bicycle Dutch also has "Riding around the bus stop" specifically on that topic in NL. For the UK context (including the accessibility issue): Ranty Highwayman has written several times on this ("Floating Bus Stops: Redux" and "Floating Bus Stops") - along other things pointing out that we have *effectively* had some of these for a long time without anyone shouting about them! Robert Weetman also has an article on this (mainly looking at the less polished Copenhagen design): "Copenhagen bus stops"